Madras High Court
G.Malar vs The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By on 12 June, 2025
Author: M.S.Ramesh
Bench: M.S. Ramesh
HCP.No.610 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.06.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
H.C.P.No.610 of 2025
G.Malar
Petitioner(s) /mother of the detenue
Vs
1. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By
Secretary To Government,
Home Prohibition And Excise
Department, Government Of Tamil
Nadu, Fort St.George,
Chennai -600 009.
2.The Commissioner Of Police
Greater Chennai,
Office Of The Commissioner Of
Police (Goondas Section), Vepery,
Chennai - 600 007.
3.The Superintendent Of Police
Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai -
600 066.
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/06/2025 04:20:08 pm )
HCP.No.610 of 2025
4.The Inspector Of Police,
K-4, Anna Nagar Police Station,
Chennai - 600 040.
Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a writ of Habeas Corpus, to call for the records relating to the
detention order dated 01.02.2025 passed by the second respondent in
No.51/B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V/2025 and quash the same and direct the
respondents herein to produce the petitioner's son Naresh @ Nareshkumar
S/o.Ganesan, aged 24 years, who is presently under going detention in the
Central Prison, Puzhal, before this court and set him at liberty forthwith.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arulselvan
For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
The petitioner herein, who is the mother of the detenu, Naresh @
Nareshkumar S/o.Ganesan, aged 24 years, confined at central prison, Puzhal,
has come forward with this petition challenging the detention order passed
by the second respondent dated 01.02.2025 slapped on her son, branding
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/06/2025 04:20:08 pm )
him as "Goonda" under the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities
of Bootleggers, Cyber Law Offenders, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders,
Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Sexual Offenders,
Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 [Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982].
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.
3. Though several grounds are raised in the petition, the learned
counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is an inordinate delay in
passing the order of detention.
4. In the instant case, the detenu was arrested on 30.12.2024 and
thereafter, the detention order came to be passed on 01.02.2025. This fact is
not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
5. In the case of 'Sushanta Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura',
reported in '2022 LiveLaw (SC) 813', when there was an inordinate delay
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/06/2025 04:20:08 pm )
from the date of proposal till passing of the detention order and likewise,
between the date of detention order and the actual arrest, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court had held that the live and proximate link, between the
grounds and the purpose of detention, stands snapped in arresting the detenu.
The relevant observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is extracted
hereunder:-
“20. It is manifestly clear from a conspectus of the above
decisions of this Court, that the underlying principle is that if
there is unreasonable delay between the date of the order of
detention & actual arrest of the detenu and in the same manner
from the date of the proposal and passing of the order of
detention, such delay unless satisfactorily explained throws a
considerable doubt on the genuineness of the requisite subjective
satisfaction of the detaining authority in passing the detention
order and consequently render the detention order bad and
invalid because the “live and proximate link” between the
grounds of detention and the purpose of detention is snapped in
arresting the detenu. A question whether the delay is
unreasonable and stands unexplained depends on the facts and
circumstances of each case.”
6. Drawing inspiration from the judgment in Sushanta Kumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/06/2025 04:20:08 pm )
Banik's case, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of 'Gomathi Vs.
Principal Secretary to Government and Others', reported in '2023 SCC
OnLine Mad 6332', had held that when there is an inordinate delay from the
date of arrest/date of proposal till the order of detention, the live and
proximate link between them would also stand snapped and thereby, had
quashed the detention order on this ground.
7. In yet another case i.e., in 'Nagaraj Vs. State of Tamil Nadu',
reported in '(2018) 3 MWN (Cri) 428', this Court had held that the delay of
36 days in passing the detention order after the arrest of the detenu would
snap the live and proximate link between the grounds and purpose of
detention. Hence, in view of the unexplained and inordinate delay in
passing the order of detention, after the arrest of the detenu, the detention
order in the present case, is liable to be quashed.
8. Accordingly, the detention order passed by the second respondent
on 01.02.2025 in No.51/B.C.D.F.G.I.S.S.S.V/2025, is hereby set aside and
the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed. The detenu viz., Naresh @
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/06/2025 04:20:08 pm )
Nareshkumar S/o.Ganesan, aged 24 years, confined at central prison, Puzhal,
is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, unless his confinement is required in
connection with any other case.
[M.S.R., J] [V.L.N., J]
12.06.2025
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet: Yes/No
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Anu
To
1. The Secretary To Government,
Home Prohibition And Excise
Department, Government Of Tamil
Nadu, Fort St.George,
Chennai -600 009.
2.The Commissioner Of Police
Greater Chennai,
Office Of The Commissioner Of
Police (Goondas Section), Vepery,
Chennai - 600 007.
3.The Superintendent Of Police
Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai -
600 066.
4.The Inspector Of Police,
K-4, Anna Nagar Police Station,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/06/2025 04:20:08 pm )
Chennai - 600 040.
5.The Joint Secretary,
Law and Order Department,
Secretariat, Chennai
6.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
Anu
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/06/2025 04:20:08 pm )
12.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/06/2025 04:20:08 pm )
